Israel: What Really Happened to the Lost Tribes? The Truth Revealed, from Scripture, Plus: Did the Kenites take over the priesthood? Examining The evidence from scripture In the Context of the Doctrine of The Shepherd's Chapel and Pastor Arnold Murray

----- Original Message -----

From: Name And Address Withheld

To: reborn@oraclesofgod.org (Paul Stringini)

Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:22 PM

Hi Paul

Its been a while,vacationing,grandchildren,and general spring and summer work .In regards to our discourse,I don't want to rehash everything that we have exchanged because it has become to unwieldy and unmanageable so I am going to stick to simple truths from the word and non of my own preamble or what I think nor any interpretation.

Pay close attention to Pauls teaching on Israels failure.

Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them:
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles,

All thirteen tribes failed ,the ten lost tribes have gone into oblivion lost from secular history and Judah with Benjamin and Levi went into constant persecution

Judah was employed by God to bring about the crucifixion of Christ and thereby salvation to all men.

Christ ordered his disciples to take the message of the Gospel to the lost sheep of the house of Israel ,employing the so called lost ten tribes to bring that message forward to the return of Christ.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

You may argue that this is talking about Judah only and that the promise is that Judah will be included with the rest of Israel to make up all of Israel but you can't use that argument because all of Israel failed to obtain that which he seeketh

You once stated that a very small percentage of mankind would have salvation,yet Gods word denies that.When Gods word makes the statement (all Israel shall be saved) I must assume that God means ALL,past present and future as he promised in the following verses:

Gen 32:12 And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good, and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.

Jer 33:22 As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.

Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

God blinded all of them but he did cull out a small percentage for his elect,his Kings and Priests,his first fruits.

Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Isa 10:22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.

Yes the first harvest is a small one in comparison to the second ,but if the host of Israel cannot be numbered, imagine the host of the gentiles

XXXX

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 12:50 PM

Subject: Re: Your original message

XXXXX,

"I am going to stick to simple truths from the word and non of my own preamble or what I think nor any interpretation."

After each place where you quote the word of God, you start interpreting. And there is nothing wrong with interpreting, except that you have to have the right interpretation.

Pay close attention to Paul's teaching on Israels failure.

I will.

Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them:
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles,

Close attention paid.

All thirteen tribes failed ,

They failed to obtain what they were "seeking" after. Or at least the remnant that was even able to seek after it. The remnants of the tribes as a whole failed to obtain salvation/the Kingdom because they rejected the Messiah, or had earlier rejected the Lord's commandments under the Old Covenant. The first five verses of Romans 11 would have covered more of that, such as the seven thousand reserved in Elijah's days.

But the tribes still exist.

the ten lost tribes have gone into oblivion lost from secular history

Not entirely. Not in the Bible either. Have you really explored that history? Or are you just taking someone's word for it, without checking them out?

the ten lost tribes have gone into oblivion lost from secular history and Judah with Benjamin and Levi went into constant persecution

There is more to the Jews than Benjamin, Judah, and Levi, others from the ten lost tribes trickled back somewhat too, there is plenty of evidence, I did just a little digging and this is what I came up with:

Luke 2:36 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;

Also in the book of Ezra Chapter 2 it is mentioned that Gibeonites (Manasseh) had married into the tribe of Levi and that they were found unfit for service in the priesthood.

You mentioned Judah, Benjamin and Levi, but there are more. There were names from other tribes mentioned in Ezrah 2 I went through most of them but not all of them, and some of them I could not trace or were shown to be of Judah, Benjamin or Levi:

Arah - is also listed in 1Chr7:39 as part of the tribe of Asher

Adin - 1Chr11:42 Mentions someone with a similar name: "Adina the son of Shiza the Reubenite"

Nebo is mentioned - 1 Chronicles 5:8 Lists them as part of Reuben

The Men of Bethel are mentioned, they belonged to Ephraim

Harim - appears to be more of the tribe of Levi

Wow, as I'm going through these I just discovered something

36 The priests: the children of Jedaiah, of the house of Jeshua, nine hundred seventy and three.
37 The children of Immer, a thousand fifty and two.
38 The children of Pashur, a thousand two hundred forty and seven.
39 The children of Harim, a thousand and seventeen.

All these families were listed as part of the tribe of Levi in 1Chronicles 9, Just check them out with your Strong's, In my last letter, I had said I found 300 more pure blood priests, well, now I found over three thousand more, (and there were other names in Ezra's list that cross checked with names in Chronicles and in other places as being of the tribe of Levi so there were even more).

I guess what I'm trying to show you is that the Jews represented all the tribes, they were the lost sheep of the house of Israel that Jesus was talking about. They were the only ones to whom the Apostles went, they are called Israel in the new testament, there is no "other Israel."

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marveled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

Jesus made this statement after a Gentile Centurion had shown great faith, they were in Capernaum, Jesus is speaking of the people of Israel, the Jews.

Luke 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.

This was speaking of john the Baptist, whose ministry did not expand beyond the Jews/Israel.

John 1:31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water

Jesus did not minister far from the people of Israel, they were the ones he was sent to.

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Jesus was sent to the "lost" Israel, which was the Jews.

John 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

The Gospels spoke frequently of the Jews as being Israel.

Acts4:27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, 28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

So does the rest of the New Testament

Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

Peter still had not been sent to the Gentiles, the Jews, Israel, were the focus.

Acts 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) 37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;

I'm going to "throw your words back in your face" except I'm going to show you how to do it properly.

Acts 13:24 When John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.

Hmmm, John the baptist preached to ALL the people of Israel, now, I heard someone say something about that word "all" recently... (this remark is in reference to earlier comments in other emails by this person that the word "all," is to always be interpreted in the most literal way possible.)

When Gods word makes the statement ... I must assume that God means ALL,

Yeah, right... where do you go now?

The tribes were not forbidden from intermarrying (it affected the Levites ability to be priests, but it was not expressly forbidden, I think...) In any case, the other tribes of the Israelites frequently intermarried and I suppose they usually were counted in the husband's tribe. So, even though the twelve tribes were not particularly distinct after the captivities (though obviously there were remnants of old families of Asher Reuben and Manasseh and others) The Jews were the twelve tribes, at least many of them were related to those tribes by a grandmother perhaps or some other thing.

I guess that leads into the next point.

Judah was employed by God to bring about the crucifixion of Christ and thereby salvation to all men.

Not exactly, I would rather say Israel, or the Jews, the way the Apostle Paul did, because I do not ever remember the tribe of Judah alone ever being singled out like that. The House of Judah as a political entity, yes, but Judah's children alone? No, the Levites, Benjamin and the other tribes who were collectively known as the "Jews." Or Israel. The Lost sheep of Israel crucified Christ.

Christ ordered his disciples to take the message of the Gospel to the lost sheep of the house of Israel

I get that part, that is in the bible. And that is what they did, until God made it clear that Israel had rejected the Gospel, and that they should go instead to the Gentiles.

,employing the so called lost ten tribes to bring that message forward to the return of Christ.

Huh? I do not understand what you mean here. I feel like I could make a guess, but please don't say I'm putting words in your mouth, I'm just making an educated guess, Just like you do after the following verses from Romans saying "you may argue" when I probably won't. If you don't want me to do this then be a little clearer.

Matt10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Identity people tend to leave off the first part.

So, when you are saying "employing the lost tribes to bring that message forward to the return of Christ" You mean that the gospel was spread to Europe, where the "lost tribes" were supposedly hiding? And that Christian nations are primarily the Lost tribes and that these nations are carrying the gospel forward? I think you mean something like that am I right?

The Lost sheep of Israel are the Jews.

The directive of Matthew 10 ended, and most of the the Apostles went to the Gentiles, Greeks, Romans, Ethiopians, etc. so that command, "Go not into the way of the Gentiles" was changed to "Go ye to the gentiles also."

I was paying close attention back there, and by the fall of Israel salvation is come to the Gentiles, not the lost tribes of Israel. The gentiles are the primary carriers of the message of Christ. After the Jews/Israel rejected Christ the Gentiles became the primary recipients of the grace of God. They (the Jews) are the Lost sheep of Israel. (they are still lost) And they do not carry the message of the gospel forth, certainly not as a nation, they are still blind.

When Jesus referred to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" he did not mean the scattered remnants of the Northern Kingdom, he meant the people that he lived among.

Matt 9:36 But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Ok, if blindness is happened to Israel, then why do identity preachers like "you know who" teach that the Christian nations are Israel. I think I know what "you know who" would say, that they are blind, blind to "who the Kenites are," blind to "the three Earth Ages," blind to, "who they really are," blind to the fact that Dr. Murray knows for a fact that the Fact that the Sixth seal was opened on a specific day in 1969, etc. But that is not the blindness that Paul was talking about.

The only "blindness" ever spoken of as afflicting Israel was in relation to the gospel, the fact that the Gentiles of Europe accepted the gospel NATIONALLY, proves that those nations could not be Israel. Only remnants of Israel believed, Europe kind of looks like that today, but that is not how they became "Christian Nations." It is not possible that a Christian nation could simultaneously be a nation of Israel, that would void the word of God.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Close attention paid. I'm going to bring this up again at the end.

You may argue that this is talking about Judah only and that the promise is that Judah will be included with the rest of Israel to make up all of Israel

...No, I definitely would not agree with that, let alone argue it, I'm not even sure what you mean and this time I'm not guessing.

but you can't use that argument because all of Israel failed to obtain that which he seeketh

Yes, so why would I? This is what I meant about it being frustrating to have words put in your mouth, but it is really no big deal. Because that is what I have been saying, ALL ISRAEL is blind, blind to the Gospel, as a nation they will never obtain salvation until the DELIVERER comes, Christ. Israel is not the Christian nations of the world, they cannot be Israel, partly because of that verse.

You once stated that a very small percentage of mankind would have salvation,

You once stated that a very small percentage of mankind would have salvation, yet Gods word denies that.

No, it does not. Are you kidding me? You invoke the phrase "God's word" at the least likely times, that phrase is only effective when it is TRUE. The scriptures you provide do not deny the words of Christ. Your mind has twisted the scriptures so that they contradict the clear words of Christ. Notice, these scriptures are actually talking about the subject, "Relatively, will a larger of a smaller portion of humanity be saved." The answer is clear. Your scriptures have nothing to do with these proportions, so they are not even authoritative on the subject.

"Lord? Are there few that be saved? Many shall seek to enter in but shall not be able." That would be a "yes."

"Narrow is the way and straight is the way that leaded to life and few there be that find it."

Now, in the overall picture, a remnant here and there, from this generation and from that, the end result is a very large number, millions, but not a very large percentage of all the people who have ever lived.

When Gods word makes the statement (all Israel shall be saved) I must assume that God means ALL,

I have PROVED that all does not automatically mean "every single one," with a long list of scriptures, but you did not let it sink down into your ears, pity for you. It is a pity that you never responded to that proof. Your interpretation would make void the judgment of God.

I must assume that God means ALL, past present and future

But you are getting ridiculous. The only reason you "must" assume that is because of your dismal reading skills and deeply entrenched delusions. When Paul said that "all Israel" will be saved he was saying so in the context of a prophecy. They will be saved, by the coming of Messiah. It was never written in the OT that all Israel will be saved, past, present, future, never. This is what was written in the OT "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:" And what Paul is doing is making a commentary on that prophecy, that when that happens "all Israel will be saved." Paul is referring to the aspects of the coming of Messiah which Christ did not fulfill in his first advent.

"All," in this context, could just as easily mean 12,000 from each tribe, with all the rest of Israel killed, weeding out the sinners and those that do iniquity (as he promised to do),

Matt 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

As you have noted, God is no respecter of persons, no one's race is going to save them. All Israel is saved, because all the tribes are intact, and the wicked are cut off from among them, THAT is salvation.

Jer 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

In order for "all" to include "past present and future" there has to be some sort of hint from the scriptures, that something like that, is what was meant. That is a very extraordinary claim, and an extraordinary claim requires some extraordinary documentation. There isn't any.

A host of things rush to the front of my mind against this interpretation. There have been so many of Israel cast off, destroyed, judged, I mean, the old testament is strewn with the corpses of those rejected by God. You basically will overturn the word of God concerning the judgment of God, are we to just throw justice out the window??? I was tempted to reprint all of Romans 2 here:

Rom2:2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Paul even goes on to specifically target "a Jew" and the implication is that they are condemned in their deeds. Chapter 3 reinforces this.

Also, It is given unto men to die once, and then be judged, the idea that men who died in sin will get a second chance is not a biblical idea.

Jn8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

There were alot of villains in Israel's history that God has no intention of granting eternal life, and as for the villains of Jesus' day, if they rejected Christ, without repenting, they will burn in hell.

1Peter4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

That is a grim picture for those that obey not the Gospel.

"All Israel" cannot be every single person who has ever existed as part of the tribes of Israel, "All Israel" just means the nation as a whole, in one sense or the other, according to the context, it does not mean the dead Israeli guy in his grave, I mean, that is just silly. There are many references in the OT to "all Israel" and I can say with authority that there was no thought for dead people. "And all Israel was gathered together, with their coffins and reliquaries and their vials of sperm..." It begins to sound like a Monty Python Sketch.

1Sam4:5 And when the ark of the covenant of the LORD came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang again. (a shout from the future? from the dead?)

Now, according to your view, what makes someone who is now dead or alive or future "of Israel?" For example, let's say a Jewish girl was sold as a slave to traders from China in 500 BC and she is taken as a concubine by some rich man over there, she bears him some children, now we are 2500 years down the road and half the nation of China (another figure of speech meaning "a whole lot") is descended from that girl, are they all Israel too? because I guarantee you, something similar happened to hundreds of thousands of captive Jews/Israel, they were swallowed up of those nations. How much Israel blood does one have to posses to be of Israel? Unless you set the bar very low, there will not be any "lost tribes" at all.

Deut 4:27 And the LORD shall scatter you among the nations, and ye shall be left few in number among the heathen, whither the LORD shall lead you.

I have often said to friends, that while I think that there is nothing to be gained by being descended from the lost tribes of Israel, it is also true that half the inhabitants of the Earth (that figure of speech again) are probably remotely descended from the lost tribes, since God scattered them into every nation under heaven, thousands of years ago it makes a lot of sense. I really do not believe that the "lost tribes" exist as Israel anymore, they were swallowed up by the nations into which they were scattered.

Mt 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Does that sound like salvation for all Israel (past present and future) to you?

I must assume that God means ALL, past present and future as he promised in the following verses:

Said as if the following verses actually support what you assert. You do that a lot, you say "As these verses indicate." and then quote a bunch of verses that do not indicate any such thing. Of all the methods of persuasion available to man I would count that among the least effective.

Gen 32:12 And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good, and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.

That is a figure of speech, it just means a very large number, in fact, Israel literally fulfilled those words in History nearly three thousand years ago. That was future from that time (of Abraham), but unrelated to what Paul said in Romans as far as proving that he meant that "all Israel meant past, present, and future."

This is what Solomon said of Israel in his day:

1Kings 3:8 And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude.

Now, was Solomon a liar? Because David had numbered Israel in the closing chapter of 2 Samuel. Nations far larger than Israel number their people. It is just a figure of speech, meaning many, many, people. The population of Israel at this time was no where near 100 million. But could you count a 100 million people if they were standing in front of you? That is the idea of innumerable (more coming on that).

Jer 33:22 As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.

Well, a guy standing there trying to count them could not tell the number, but God has numbered them, and science has estimated their number. So they can be numbered, again this is a figure of speech meaning, "so numerous that they cannot be counted by a man simply counting them." (much more coming on that)

Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

That would be the remnant which would return.

Deut 4:29 But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.

God blinded all of them but he did cull out a small percentage for his elect,his Kings and Priests,his first fruits.

I don't like the word "cull" because that is what I do to the weak animals in my flock. But I do not disagree with the basic meaning here.

Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Ok, and the same is true till this day, what next? The Election are the true seed of Abraham, not the children of the flesh. Not that God will not call more out of that nation again. (I have read of 144,000 men)

Isa 10:22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.

In Isaiah's day they were "as the sand of the sea" but when the Assyrian carried them away only a remnant returned.

Yes the first harvest is a small one in comparison to the second , but if the host of Israel cannot be numbered, imagine the host of the gentiles

The host of Israel was innumerable, but then came the captivities, then they returned and became a great nation again, but then came the Diaspora. Even so, they have returned again and have become a great nation, more numerous than ever. That was one kind of fulfillment, that was the flesh.

(here is that "much more") But if you are going to tell me that they are LITERALLY innumerable then I have to dismiss you, 1 million could be an innumerable host, if you are going to go all literal on me here then I have to ask...(and, as typical of bad interpreters, you always go by the letter instead of by the spirit at the wrong points) Is one trillion people innumerable? Well, no, not literally, there are definitely ways that we could count them, we could have them all pass through a turnstile, we could take a census. McDonalds, has numbered their customers for years into the billions, they got tired of it after 9 (or was it 99) billion or so, and now just say, "billions and billions," but still, they could have kept counting. There is no finite number that, literally, "cannot be numbered," the definition of finite numbers ensures that they CAN be numbered, the only numbers that LITERALLY can not be numbered are infinite numbers.

I have imagined the host of the Gentiles and a few hundred million would be a very big innumerable host. The host of the Gentiles are also counted as the seed of Abraham (by the way) for the fulfillment of that promise. The true seed of Abraham are the seed of promise, not the literal seed. I am the seed of Abraham, not because I had a member of the lost tribes in my ancestry (if I even did) but because I belong to Christ. So says the scriptures

Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The whole point of Romans 9, 10 and 11 is that not every literal son of Abraham is chosen for salvation, and not every literal son of Isaac and not every literal Jew either, that is the whole point, even though the whole nation of Israel is Elect, only a small portion is going to obtain salvation.

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2008 4:38 AM

Subject: Re: Your original message

I cannot dispute the fact that a minute portion of the house of Israel escaped from the Assyrians,and that only makes sense.It also makes sense that not totally all of what is called the northern kingdom came out of Judea because there would always be some individuals who would have stayed with Judah,Benjamin and Levi in the southern Kingdom.And vice versa there would be some of those of the southern kingdom who would break away and join the northern kingdom,regardless they would be insignificant in the scheme of things. Also it was God who made the distinction. He called the northern tribes Israel and the southern tribes Judah,and did not make the distinction that Benjamin and Levi where other than part of Judah. And again those tribes that composed the northern kingdom he called Israel but God also called them Ephraim and Manasseh as a whole.

I think that you may have misinterpreted the following verse:

Israel which was the northern kingdom is at this time in oblivion.,removed from the land,so (blindness in part) refers to Judah .All that is left of original Israel before the split with any significant numbers is Judah,which encompasses Benjamin and Levi.You can't use the argument that Israel was blinded in part in this instance as all of Israel. All that was left of original Israel in the original land of Israel was Judah.You can say that what was left of all of original Israel was blinded.,because Judah was totally not partially blinded to the mystery of Christ and I am not talking numbers here but spiritually. I hope you can follow my drift.

Their blindness was the factor that invariably led to the crucifixion and thereby salvation to the Gentile through Christ who again invariably came into the flesh through non other than the tribe of Judah and Levi.In a sense the fact that Christ came forth from Judah and Levi who rejected him because of their blindness might seem ironic but it isn't. God planned it that way so that Christ could claim both the Priesthood and the Kingship. Regardless salvation comes to both Israel and the Gentile through Christ ,and again the Gentile did not obtain it either for they never sought it,it is come to them by default or if you wish by Israels forfiture. What I am saying that all of Israel failed to obtain what he seeketh . However God did use both the kingdoms of Israel to bring salvation to the rest of the world or if you wish the Gentiles. One through the rejection of Christ and the other he would use to spread the gospel

WE AGREE THAT THE ELECTION HAS OBTAIN SALVATION.

Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles,

Lets bring forth this verse which you claim refers to Judah.

Mat 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
Mat 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

How do you explain the following verse

Mat 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

The following verses Qualify and support the previous verse as to how long this will take

Matt 24:27
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Matt 24:30
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Matt 25:13
13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

Mark 13:26
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

Luke 18:8
8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Luke 21:27
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

The apostles took that Gospel to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And through them world wide

Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Even the old testament supports Matt 10 :5&6 in regards to Ephraim and Manasseh pushing the peoples to the ends of the world.

Deu 33:16 And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren.
Deu 33:17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

I still don't know when Mat 10:23 became null and void.

How do you explain the following verses

Ezek 37:15 The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,
Ezek 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
Ezek 37:17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
Ezek 37:18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by these?
Ezek 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
Ezek 37:20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.
Ezek 37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
Ezek 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

Do you notice that all Israel is now pared down to Judah and Ephraim and thier companions.

Is Ezek an end time prophet ?,is he prophesying about events yet to come?,are those two houses still split today ?do those who are in left in the land of Israel today have a king over them?

Christ is King over all so it will be non other than him who will rule over Israel upon the throne of David,.but that hasn't happened yet.So if that has not happened yet niether has the joining of the two sticks.of the two hoses of Israel.

Ezek 37:24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.

What do you make of the following verses Paul.

Ezek 37:1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,
Ezek 37:2 And caused me to pass by them round about: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry.
Ezek 37:3 And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord GOD, thou knowest.
Ezek 37:4 Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
Ezek 37:5 Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live:
Ezek 37:6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
Ezek 37:7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.
Ezek 37:8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.
Ezek 37:9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.
Ezek 37:10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
Ezek 37:11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.
Ezek 37:12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
Ezek 37:13 And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
Ezek 37:14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.

Thank you for maintaining civility in this thread.

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:38 AM

Subject: Re: Your original message

I cannot dispute the fact that a minute portion of the house of Israel escaped from the Assyrians,and that only makes sense.

Also, would you dispute that a minute portion of the House of Judah escaped from the Assyrian? Surprised? Confused? Read on.

(I don't know if "minute" is the right word, it may have been about 10% Isa 6:13 But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof)

It also makes sense that not totally all of what is called the northern kingdom came out of Judea because there would always be some individuals who would have stayed with Judah,Benjamin and Levi in the southern Kingdom.

I presume that you mean that people who belonged to the northern tribes but who lived in the southern kingdom would not have necessarily gone captive with the northern nation. Ok.

The Assyrian Captivity affected all the tribes and both kingdoms, the tribe of Judah and the southern kingdom went captive to the Assyrians after the northern tribes. That is a point that is usually not emphasized but it is true, Judah almost perished as well.

Isa 36:1 Now it came to pass in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah, that Sennacherib king of Assyria came up against all the defenced cities of Judah, and took them.

Only Jerusalem escaped. So the nation was not wiped out because it's king was still intact, unlike the northern kingdom, the remnants of all the tribes coalesced under the leadership of the Southern Kingdom (which probably escaped captivity to a greater extent. There was no Northern kingdom anymore.

And vice versa there would be some of those of the southern kingdom who would break away and join the northern kingdom,regardless they would be insignificant in the scheme of things.

Ok.

Also it was God who made the distinction. He called the northern tribes Israel and the southern tribes Judah,and did not make the distinction that Benjamin and Levi where other than part of Judah. And again those tribes that composed the northern kingdom he called Israel but God also called them Ephraim and Manasseh as a whole.''

No problem there. By the same token, It was Jesus who never referred to either kingdom, but consistently called the former Kingdom of Judah, "Israel." The apostles carried on this tradition, referring to the Jews as "Israel." and "all Israel"

I think that you may have misinterpreted the following verse:

It wouldn't be the first time I'd done something like that.

Israel which was the northern kingdom is at this time in oblivion.,removed from the land,so (blindness in part) refers to Judah .

That does not make sense. The man who wrote Romans 11:25 was a Jew, all the first believers were Jews. So that can't be right.

Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Bob, this is very simple, Paul himself provides the answer, if part of Israel was blinded, the blinded part would be "the rest" referred to here which are not included in the election. There is no grounds to say that "Judah is blind" "Israel is not" Like I said before the new testament refers to the Jews as "All Israel"

All that is left of original Israel before the split with any significant numbers is Judah,which encompasses Benjamin and Levi.

That is pretty presumptive. Do you have any documentation to back up that claim? I found thousands in Ezra.

I hope you can follow my drift.

I'm trying here. It isn't easy

You can't use the argument that Israel was blinded in part in this instance as all of Israel.

You are saying that I can't say that the Israel which was blinded is all Israel? Why not? Part of them were blinded, but the election hath obtained it. What's wrong with that?

All that was left of original Israel in the original land of Israel was Judah.

Wrong. I thought we agreed that there were other tribes there, I provided documentation. If the family of Jacob multiplied from about 70 people in Egypt to millions in the space of less than 400 years... How many of the tribe of Asher do you suppose there were in Israel during the time of Christ FIVE HUNDRED years after over 1000 arrived back at Jerusalem with Ezra??? What do you think happened to the over 1000 Gibeonites FIVE HUNDRED YEARS LATER????? They multiplied Bob, there were hundreds of thousands of them.

If just one or two families of each tribe returned with Ezra, FIVE HUNDRED YEARS BEFORE CHRIST, then by the time of Chirst they would have multiplied to hundreds of thousands. That is why, in Jesus day, the nation of the Jews is referred to as "ALL ISRAEL."

You can say that what was left of all of original Israel was blinded.

No you can't because many believed on his name, just not the nation as a whole. The election obtained it, the rest were blinded.

because Judah was totally not partially blinded to the mystery of Christ and I am not talking numbers here but spiritually.

Totally, not partially? Whether by numbers or by spirit you cannot say that the Jews were totally blinded, because PAUL IS SAYING THE OPPOSITE: That "the rest" were blinded.

Bob, you start off telling me that I misinterpret Rom 11:25, and here you are trying to tell me that what it plainly states, is actually not true. You are saying that the only known Israel, the Jews, were totally blinded, but the Apostle Paul is saying that only in part were they blinded. Maybe I'm mistaken in your meaning, but I don't see how.

Well, their non-total blindness was a big factor in salvation coming to the gentiles, because without some of the Jews being able to see, there never would have been salvation to the gentiles, because that salvation came by the mouths of Jews. The Jews First.

In a sense the fact that Christ came forth from Judah and Levi who rejected him because of their blindness might seem ironic but it isn't. God planned it that way so that Christ could claim both the Priesthood and the Kingship.

It was not just Judah and Levi that rejected Christ, it was all the tribes. It is true that Jesus came from Levi and Judah but that really has no impact on this discussion.

Matthew is supposed to have come from the family of Levi (I think that was his other name) and some of the rest of Jesus followers doubtless came from other tribes of Israel (I am supposing that, but it would make sense since he was sent to ALL Israel and all the tribes would be present.)

Regardless salvation comes to both Israel and the Gentile through Christ ,and again the Gentile did not obtain it either for they never sought it,it is come to them by default or if you wish by Israels forfiture.

Ok. But, of course, the Election of Israel does still obtain it to this day. And even among the Gentiles really, only a small portion will obtain eternal life (but there are more Gentiles than Jews so the overall number is greater).

What I am saying that all of Israel failed to obtain what he seeketh .

Ok. I think I agree with that, I don't see how what you have been saying leads up to that.

However God did use both the kingdoms of Israel to bring salvation to the rest of the world or if you wish the Gentiles.

Ok, but why the distinction between the houses? In the new testament I see that concept deemphasized.

One through the rejection of Christ and the other he would use to spread the gospel

I cannot agree with that. Where do you get that? Please document that with scripture. I ask, but I know there is not any scripture that teaches that. Shouldn't we limit ourselves somewhat in what we suppose to be true? I mean, we all do it, but there has to be a limit, there has to be a standard, you need to have good evidence to suppose something like that, and I think that you are going over the top here.

Some of the very people who rejected Christ were the first converts on Pentecost

Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
In the course of the same speech Peter continued...
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

On the strength of a bad interpretation of Rom 11:25 (really you are not even interpreting the text, you are reading things into it, heavily) it is not sensible to suppose that God used one house to crucify and the other to spread the gospel. There are scriptures that say otherwise (I'll get to them)

It is not even true. It is patently false. The Jews spread the Gospel, THE JEWS SPREAD THE GOSPEL, not the lost captives of the northern kingdom, who may not even exist. Bob, what you are saying NEVER HAPPENED. It never did. The JEWS spread the gospel, so your whole idea here is just wrong. It is far-out. I mean WAY far-out. The Jews SPREAD THE GOSPEL Paul, Peter, Barnabbas, Andrew, Bartholomew, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Nathaniel, and many others.

The people that spread the gospel after the Jewish church faded were the Gentiles, not the lost captives of the northern kingdom, those who continued to spread the gospel were the Gentiles. That is a matter of history, the Greeks were not Israel, the Romans were not Israel, they are called Gentiles in the Bible, as are all the other nations in the Roman Empire, they were all Gentiles, the Anglo-Saxons were not converted for a nearly a thousand years, and at the end of the sword (also a matter of history), if they were Israel then they were a little late for your theory and not very enthusiastic either.

WE AGREE THAT THE ELECTION HAS OBTAIN SALVATION.

Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles,

Good, because that is what makes your whole theory unnecessary.

Lets bring forth this verse which you claim refers to Judah.

And they did what he said, are you suggesting that they disobeyed Christ? I mean, If it is NOT Judah, as you suggest, then the disciples disobeyed Christ, because that is to whom they went, "the Jews." Do you suppose that maybe they knew better than you do what and who he was talking about???

Something you fail to grasp, that the Jews (and Jesus) thought of themselves as Israel, they did not have this ANAL need to distinguish between the House of Judah and the House of Israel. There was only one nation of Israel in the Days of Jesus, the two branches had become one stick, as promised by Ezekiel..

Eze 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: 17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by these? 19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. 20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.
21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen,

(this is just before the return from the Babylonian Captivity, notice that he does not refer to the two houses of Israel but to one)

whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.
24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.

Most of that was fulfilled in the time between Ezra and Christ, all that is missing was the King, but there was no more tow kingdoms ever again. How do you know that even more of the house of Israel was not gathered during that time? If Israel is Europe or some part of Europe then Is rael has been broken into MANY sticks. And that is NOT IN PROPHECY.

How do you explain the following verse

Mat 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

XXXX, context, context, context. *sigh*

You are trying to tell me that at the beginning of Jesus ministry, by this statement, he meant the second coming? That is very bad. He was about to go away for a short while (not to heaven) and would return to them shortly. This is so easy, LOOK:

Mt10:1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.

Matthew 10 is the instruction of Jesus to the twelve as they are about to be sent out.

Mt 11:1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities.

Jesus went bye-bye. So it makes sense that he would say this, "Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come." He was leaving them for only a little while, and they would not have time to go everywhere. They would not be preaching to the Gentiles or the Samaritans (but later would be) Bob, you are failing to read the Bible again.

You need to stop ignoring this next verse, and start reading whole chapters of the bible as they are written.

Mt 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

Wake up, look at that. Starting in the book of Acts they DID go the way of the Gentiles, before then Jesus had come and gone and come and gone but then he really went, and the instruction to ONLY God to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Expired. How the heck do the gentiles EVER come in if you apply Mt10:5,6 to the second advent? The gentiles would never come in.

The following verses Qualify and support the previous verse as to how long this will take

Bob, the following verses are 14 chapters away! You are totally out of context here. The events described here are not the same as in chapter 10, Not by a long shot.

Bob, this is terrible. In Chap. 10 Jesus was just going away for a little while. He was not talking about the second advent, The son of man was already among them. He was just going away for a bit.

The following verses Qualify and support the previous verse as to how long this will take

Mark 13:26
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

Luke 18:8
8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Luke 21:27
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

You have to be kidding me, totally aside from what we are discussing, these verses do not indicate how long it would be before Christ returns. They just don't, and they have no bearing on Matt 10 because Matthew ten is about something that happened before the Gospel was preached to the Gentiles, first by Peter, then by Paul and Barnabbas (Jews).

It is interesting that in Luke when this event is described (the sending forth of the twelve) that he leaves out some of the specifics, but does mention that Jesus rise to national prominence coincided with the sending forth of the twelve.

Luke 9:1 Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases. 2 And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.
3 And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. 4 And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and thence depart. 5 And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.

6 And they departed, and went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing every where.

7 Now Herod the tetrarch heard of all that was done by him: and he was perplexed, because that it was said of some, that John was risen from the dead; 8 And of some, that Elias had appeared; and of others, that one of the old prophets was risen again. 9 And Herod said, John have I beheaded: but who is this, of whom I hear such things? And he desired to see him.

10 And the apostles, when they were returned, told him all that they had done. And he took them, and went aside privately into a desert place belonging to the city called Bethsaida.

It was during this time that Jesus rose to national renown.

The apostles took that Gospel to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And through them world wide

Yes, first to the Jews in Judea and Galilee (which was the land of the northern kingdom) and the Jews in the Roman Empire and beyond and then the Jews took it to the Gentiles. But no to the Idea that any lost kingdom had any part in this. The Jews were the lost sheep. It is absolutely clear. Who hath bewitched you, O, Bob?

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

There is no third Group. PERIOD. The new testament does not contain this ANAL insistence that the tribes be considered separate entities, there are numerous examples of this lack of distinction, I named many of them, but you have two verses that you have not even read properly. It does not work Bob.

Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

No matter how many verses I show you which prove that there is no distinction, you keep insisting there is. I say only in the mind of those who follow this doctrine.

Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

This is where you should have said:

The following verses Qualify and support the previous verse as to how long this will take

But even so, Matthew 10 is not about the second advent, it is about the first. Jesus was still preaching the kingdom, he had not even been rejected yet. You really need to pay attention to CONTEXT.

Even the old testament supports Matt 10 :5&6 in regards to Ephraim and Manasseh pushing the peoples to the ends of the world.

XXXXX, this is the place where I want to reach out and shake you, like, "Snap out of it." This is just no way to interpret the bible.

Matt 10:5 refers to "do not go the way of the Gentiles." But they DID. THEY DID. Matt 10 is TIME LIMITED. It does not fit in to the post Peter-to-the-gentiles world. It can't fit. Do you even see that?

Matt 10:5,6 say nothing about "pushing people to the ends of the earth," ...sigh, whatever, I'll say no more, this is unbelievable.

These verses have no bearing on Matt 10 as far as I can see. You read too much into this, it goes beyond interpretation, beyond even opinion. They did this in the kingdom, and with Joshua, but sometimes they were beat too, so what? A blessing was given, but you can't interpret the bible with Deuteronomy in one hand and a modern map in the other, that's not how its done.

I still don't know when Mat 10:23 became null and void.

I do, when Jesus was reunited with his disciples after they had gone over nearly all the towns. Read the book, Bob, read the book.

How do you explain the following verses

I should have read your whole message before replying, you already have my interpretation.

Ezek 37:15 The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,
Ezek 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
Ezek 37:17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
Ezek 37:18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by these?
Ezek 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
Ezek 37:20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.
Ezek 37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
Ezek 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

Do you notice that all Israel is now pared down to Judah and Ephraim and thier companions.

Now?? No, I don't. They were, but by the time of Christ, they had been joined again.

Is Ezek an end time prophet ?

Is he NOT a prophet of his own time as well??? You bet he was. All the prophets primarily spoke of things in their own times, there was never any such thing as an exclusive "end time" prophet (The Book of Revelation (perhaps) Excepted, but John wrote a lot more than Revelation). XXXXX, you are out on a limb. Ezekiel was not just an end time prophet.

is he prophesying about events yet to come?

Only partly. They were yet to come in his days. But mostly fulfilled by the time of Christ, Jesus came to a united Israel.

,are those two houses still split today ?

No. They are not split, you cannot prove they are split, there is no split among the Jews, there is no more house of Israel and house of Judah, they were united 2500 years ago. There exist no separate houses of Israel, that is a fact, they do not exist, you cannot point to them as separate nations, they are one. GOD did as he promised and brought the houses together and then he sent the promised King, but the King was Rejected and the people scattered again.

Plus you said that the nations were "pared down" to Ephraim and Judah, but who then is Ephraim? (I know what many will say but I was trying to see what this guy thought)

do those who are in left in the land of Israel today have a king over them?

Do they have two kings? "neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all" Are there two kings?

Ezek 37:24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.

They do have a King, he (Jesus) is their king, whether they like it or not, Jesus is enthroned on high. But they rejected him so they do not inherit a kingdom. That is the one part that could be said to be not fulfilled, but Christ appeared to a united Israel, they rejected the king and were scattered again, but were still no more two houses, he is their king enthroned in Heaven, and will avenge them when he saves them.

Christ is King over all so it will be non other than him who will rule over Israel upon the throne of David,.but that hasn't happened yet.

You could argue that. But this...

So if that has not happened yet niether has the joining of the two sticks.of the two hoses of Israel.

WHOA! No, that is not how it goes with prophecy, not at all, and you should know better. The bible has many partial fulfillments of prophecy and I shouldn't even have to give examples, because I know that you know it. Did you think that would slip by? That is like saying that because Jesus did not establish a worldwide dominion that he didn't come lowly and on an ass either.

Zech9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth.

You can't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

The joining of the two sticks has happened, Just look at the new testament, it is evident. The Jews are all Israel. There is no other house.

It is much more reasonable to think that all those who would ever return from the northern kingdom would have returned within the time frame leading up to Messiah, because God had promised to unify them and give them a King, there is no rejection of the unification, and it would not make sense for God to send the King and yet not first unify them. The unification has to come first.

What do you make of the following verses Paul.

In regards to the current subject, I have no comments so far.

Ezek 37:7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.Ezek 37:8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.Ezek 37:9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.Ezek 37:10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.

Still nothing yet.

Ezek 37:11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.

The term "Whole house of Israel" refers to the combined 12 tribes.This verse is KEY

Ezek 37:12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.Ezek 37:13 And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,Ezek 37:14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.

Well, in the literal sense, I believe in the resurrection of the dead, not the transmigration of souls, so this all makes sense to me. If we are talking about the symbolical aspect of this then this is what I think.

"behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts"

This is given as the reason for the prophecy, the reason was because of their national dissolution. The latter part of this chapter addresses that national dissolution. This was fulfilled when Israel returned under Ezra. It has been (or may have been) fulfilled again after the Holocaust.

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 4:32 PM

Subject: Re: Your original message

Ok Paul I will try to simplify my position,I guess I lack some ability to make myself clear

First of all there seems to be a gap between us ,you speak of Jews ,I am speaking of Judah and Levi as one and the rest of Israel as the other ,being two different entities used by God for two different purposes.This seems to be the bone of contention,and we probably will never agree,but so be it.

You claim that the following verses became obsolete

Mat 15:22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
Mat 15:23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel...

I don't believe that they became obsolete ,yes they may have been added to but not made null and void.

The following verse is the first verse in the Gospel of James and it states that he is writing this to the twelve tribes scattered abroad. For James wrote this after the crucifixion

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

I can accept your position on those scattered abroad as meaning the smattering of the other tribes within Judah that had escaped the Assyrian dispersion,regardless they accepted the new covenant so they were not blinded.You can not deny Christ's own words for he would not make this statement in vain.(I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.) I am not saying that it was Christ's total mission but it was his initial one.

Judah and Levi inside their own ancestral land rejected Christ because Christ posed a threat to those institutions they occupied ,for they knew that the messiah would claim both seats of those institutions.So that is the portion of Israel that was blinded and is blinded to this very day.That blindness has not been removed.What does it mean to be Jewish today,for is it not true that the Jews of today are still waiting for their Messiah?The thing is that all those that call themselves Jews today are not all of the tribe of Judah or Levi and have become blinded to the truth of Christ by association through the traditions and the practices of Judah and Levi throughout the ages.In that sense you could say that all of Israel is blinded,regardless it is after the fact in that (in part) of Israel (Judah and Levi) were blinded to the mystery of Christ. And of course salvation came to the world first by the Jew for Christ was Born of the house of Judah and the house of Levi.

I can not deny the fact that Christ added to their commission to include the gentile, for it is true. As I hope you will accept the fact that there was much more of Israel scattered abroad outside of ancestral Israel then inside of it.Those outside their ancestral lands would not be influenced by their leaders to reject Christ including those of Judah.

Yes all of Israel rejected the old covenant and that is why God punished them with the Assyrian dispersion of (Israel) northern kingdom and the Babylonian captivity of the southern kingdom(Judah)Not all of Israel but only Judah and Levi rejected the new covenant .To this very day they are blind to the salvation in Christ

Why would I dispute Isa: 6:13

Paul you use the following verse as to proof that my position on the blindness of Judah, which we have been contending about, is incorrect.

Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

This verse is not in regards to the new covenant rather it is in regards to the blindness of all of Israel to the old covenant .

Rom 11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
Rom 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
Rom 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

So even though Israel rejected the first covenant God gleaned 7000 out of it.

Now God punished Israel for rejecting that first covenant with dispersion and the lose of national identity.God punished Judah for rejecting the first covenant with blindness to the new covenant.

Paul the apostle tells us there is also now at the time that he is speaking of, that there is also a remnant according to the election of grace.This election of grace has come about as the result of the new covenant and part of that election would be of the lost sheep of the house of Israel.For the twelve are of that brand for starters.

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

Paul the apostle goes on to tell us that they (Judah) are blinded to this very day,his day, well after the death of Christ.

Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them:
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.

You are getting two different cases of blindness mixed up.And so it is that Judah is in the previously described condition to this very day,for they are still looking for their Messiah.

He goes on to say that some of the branches were broken off of the original tree,not all.

Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

They were broken off so that you and I may be grafted in and that condition will stay in effect until the time of the gentiles is finished. Go ahead deny it.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

And what do you know! they are election even as they are cursed. God is fair. Yes God is going to heal the breach and I am fully aware of that but it has not happened yet

Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

Rom 11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

They are elect and God loves them,why should I love them any less.They are under a curse for the time being for our sakes.

WE the Gentiles will be grafted in through faith according to grace, as joint heirs

Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
Rom 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together

Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Titus 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

James 2:5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?

There will be no joining of two sticks until all of the joint heirs(the rest of Israel) have been grafted in.

When God lifts that curse he will graft them back in ,that is join the two sticks.

Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

And so all of Israel shall be saved ,but the grafting in of the ( joint heirs) Gentile part of Israel has not been completed

So what has been established. It has been established that all of Israel was blind to the first covenant.

It has been established that not all of Israel was blinded to the second covenant ,for the lost sheep of the house of Israel accepted it.

It has been established that part of Israel has been blinded for the sake of the Gentile.

It has been established that part of Israel has been blinded and will stay blind until the time of the Gentile has come to an end or run its full course.

It has been established that those in Christ become joint heirs with ancestral Israel

It has been established that the joining of the joint heirs and the regrafting of the broken branches too Israel will complete it and so all Israel will be saved.

It has been established that all of Israel is elect wether joint heirs or ancestral

In 70 AD Israel was literally destroyed by the Romans and Israel again lost its national identity, not just for 70 years as in the Babylonian captivity but for 2000 years.Throughout the world during that 2000 years they have been continuously persecuted and conflicted to this very day because of the curse of blindness that God placed upon them.So what is all this jargon that you are spouting about prophecy.Yes in 1948 God began gathering them back to Israel the ancestral land but there is still no peace or joining together ,for the process of grafting in of the Gentile is not complete.

Paul, this has nothing to do with racism it is our fathers word.But here we go again ,I am now not only a racist but an anal racist.I have endeavored to keep this exchange free from that kind of rhetoric but you could not resist. Yes you may say that I am too sensitive,but I have been here for a while,taking your guff.If I am anal for trying to prove a point ,what does it make you for denying everything I bring forth?I have told you before and I am telling you again ,if you persist I will end the thread,and that is what I am doing right here and now. Have your say and post.

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:29 PM

Subject: Re: Your original message

Bob, You wrote your summary before I even had a chance to reply to this, that is annoying.

Ok Paul I will try to simplify my position,I guess I lack some ability to make myself clear

I do understand your position, I speak of the Jews as being the twelve tribes, you do need to be very clear about who you are talking about, because the bible refers to all the tribes variably as Jews or Israelites, I understand the separation you are trying to create, hopefully I'lll be able to follow you.

You claim that the following verses became obsolete

I don't believe that they became obsolete ,yes they may have been added to but not made null and void.

Not "null and void," it is just that they no longer apply to any living person, thar directive only applies to that time, that context. It was not absolute, Jesus himself went to the Samaritans, but not to the whole nation of the Samaritans.

I'd like to know how these verses are supposed to be applied in this day and age??? There is no appication that I can see. I know you are not a racist, don't take this the wrong way, but if these verses are still active, should I stop preaching to Blacks? (That is just a rhetorical question, I know that the answer is no, but still, if we are still supposed to heed this directive, who exactly should we apply it?) Your position creates that sort of question. If these verses are not obsolete then how should I apply them to my ministry?

The idea that this verse has only been "added to" is a cop-out. What exactly has been added to it? I'll tell you what was added to it. "YOu may now disregard this directive." or how about adding this, "This directive has expired."

Adding to the word is no different than taking away. If you add the command "DO go to the Gentiles." you have added, but you have also taken away from the former command to "NOT" go.

The following verse is the first verse in the Gospel of James and it states that he is writing this to the twelve tribes scattered abroad. For James wrote this after the crucifixion

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

He wrote to the "12" tribes, not the "10" He was writing to Jews like these:

Acts 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

If he was writing to "lost tribes" how would he know where to address the letter?? If they had forgotten who they are, then how would they know the letter was for them?? James was writing to the scattered Jews. That is very clear.

I'm not sure that is my position, I totally disagree that the other tribes were just a smattering. If a thousand of the tribe of Asher arrived at Jerusalem with Ezra then by the time of Jesus they would have easily numbered in the hundreds of thousands (and that is being very conservative). I'm waiting for you to acknowledge this, if you start with a thousand people, how many do you end up with five hundred years later? Also, more probably continued to return after Ezra was writtn, Ezra merely represents the first wave. It is interesting that in the book of Ezra that none of the people are numbered according to tribe but according to family (except for some of the Levites for obvious reasons) what better evidence that God was making the tribes one stick? By not numbering them according to tribe the lord may have been signifying the unity of the twelve tribes.

You can not deny Christ's own words for he would not make this statement in vain.(I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.) I am not saying that it was Christ's total mission but it was his initial one.

Ok, you say that was his "initial" mission, whenever he strayed from the borders of Israel (geographical Israel) he ran into Gentiles and pretty much returned back to geographic Israel, so the question that comes to my mind is if Jesus was only sent to the Lost sheep and the lost sheep lived somewhere else other than the land of Israel, then was no Jesus a failure in his mission, because he never went to Saxony or Angloland,

If Jesus mission was to go only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, then I say that is EXACTLY what he did, he went to the Jews. Bob, pardon me, but I can't figure out what your logic is based on. If, by this statement, "the lost sheep of Israel" Jesus meant some lost tribes in the north, then why did he not go to them???? If the term "lost sheep of Israel" DOES NOT mean the Jews, then why DID he go to the Jews? If he was not sent to the Jews, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, then why did he never venture far from Judea, Galilee, and Samaria????????? The Lost sheep of Israel HAVE TO BE the Jews, because Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep, and the only people he went to were the Jews (a few Samaritans (John 4,) He was sent to the Lost sheep, he was snt to the Jews, the Jews are the Lost sheep.

Judah and Levi inside their own ancestral land

I just wanted to separate this off for clarity, don't forget Manasseh, Asher, Ephraim, and the rest, they were there too, I HAVE PROOF, you have IMAGINATION. Remember that Abraham's family multiplied from 1 to millions in 400 years, this time the Jews had an additional 100 years to multiply. Look what happened when Benjamin was in danger of extinction, I didn't want to quote the whole chapter, but they made sure the tribe was not cut off.

Judges 21:3 And said, O LORD God of Israel, why is this come to pass in Israel, that there should be to day one tribe lacking in Israel? 6 And the children of Israel repented them for Benjamin their brother, and said, There is one tribe cut off from Israel this day. 15 And the people repented them for Benjamin, because that the LORD had made a breach in the tribes of Israel. 17 And they said, There must be an inheritance for them that be escaped of Benjamin, that a tribe be not destroyed out of Israel.

The idea that after 500 years of History the other tribes were still only"a smattering" is not realistic, I'm not about to put words in your mouth, just take this for what it is, my perception.

On the one hand it seems you would have me believe that the bulk of the tribes (the lost tribes) exist in a land far from their ancestral home. You would have me believe that these scattered remnants whom God said were left "few in number" multiplied into star-like multitudes, in hostile lands far from home, forgetting their identity yet still maintaining their tribal integrity.

On the other hand you would have me believe that among their own kin, and in their own land that these remnants would not have multiplied into large numbers, but would remain merely a smattering after 500 years in friendly territory among their own kin.

XXXX, I find it impossible to believe you.

rejected Christ because Christ posed a threat to those institutions they occupied ,

That could only be true of those in who were parts of those institutions, I think that you are oversimplifying it a bit here.

for they knew that the messiah would claim both seats of those institutions.

I don't know if you can say that was why they did what they did, you are over-reaching a bit here... I think it is likely that they feared that he would bring the Romans down on them, they did not believe that he could protect them from the Romans. As it is written:

John 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

Men are complicated, I'm sure there were many reasons for their actions.

So that is the portion of Israel that was blinded and is blinded to this very day.That blindness has not been removed.

You mean, "Judah and Levi inside their own ancestral land," don't you? I've said this before but you never respond to it, if the "part of Israel that was blind" meant that Group, then why did most of jesus disciples come from that group? Why did all the early converts come from that group?

That blindness has not been removed.

Yes, but the election has obtained it, the only group that isn't blinded is the ELECT, You and I agree that the elect are exce3pted, but can you and I also agree that the rest are blind? The reast means everybody else, besides the elect.

What does it mean to be Jewish today,for is it not true that the Jews of today are still waiting for their Messiah?

As always, being Jewish means different thing to different people, to Dr. Murray being Jewish means that you are a Kenite (and I know you don't believe that) to others, being Jewish means that you are a follower of the Jews religion, but usually it means that you are part of the jewish family by blood.

for is it not true that the Jews of today are still waiting for their Messiah?

In general. But there are jews (in my third category) that already believe in Jesus, you've heard of jews for Jesus, so they are not all blind, are they?

The thing is that all those that call themselves Jews today are not all of the tribe of Judah or Levi

No, you are right, they are not, they are of all twelve tribes.

and have become blinded to the truth of Christ by association through the traditions and the practices of Judah and Levi throughout the ages.

Ok, but the election is still obtaining it.

In that sense you could say that all of Israel is blinded,regardless it is after the fact in that (in part) of Israel (Judah and Levi) were blinded to the mystery of Christ.

I don't understand where you have taken me here, I don't get the point. You are focusing on Judah and Levi, and I don't know why. Is no one in any other tribe blind??? Are no gentiles blind?? I tell you the truth the only ones who are not blind in this world are the elect, whether of the Jews or of the Gentiles.

And of course salvation came to the world first by the Jew for Christ was Born of the house of Judah and the house of Levi.

Not just by the Jew but to the Jew. And the Jews are Israel. The Bible calls them Israel.

I can not deny the fact that Christ added to their commission to include the gentile, for it is true.

As I hope you will accept the fact that there was much more of Israel scattered abroad outside of ancestral Israel then inside of it.

I do not know how you can just say that, I certainly cannot agree based on such nonspecific terms. You are assuming, nothing more.

You have to clarify when you say "scattered abroad." Do you mean the known Jews scattered abroad? Or the "lost tribes?" Because there is a big difference between the lost tribes who were basically pagans, and the devout Jews who lived in other nations who went to synogogue and read the Torah. There is a big difference between someone who knew he was a Jew, and some tenth-breed "bastard" who has 10% Jewish/Israelite blood living among pagans as a pagan and had no idea that he was an Israelite.

I find it impossible that a people so stripped of their identity and living among pagans, who were cast out of their land because they did not worship the Lord their God, who did not have the Torah, should maintain their tribes. It is impossible that they should outnumber the KNOWN Jews.

So if you are saying that the known Jews that were scattered outnumbered the Jews who lived in Israel, I doubt it, but I won't argue with you.

BUT, If you are saying that the unknown lost Israelites outnumbered the known Israelites I have to disagree with my whole heart, it makes no sense.

Those outside their ancestral lands would not be influenced by their leaders to reject Christ including those of Judah.

You assume that the blindness is merely the result of the influence of one particular leadership, but it is not, when the Pagan tribes of northern Europe were being converted their leaders resisted as well. There are many things that blind people not just earthly leaders. The "god of this world" blinds people but ultimately this is the truth

-*+

Ex4:11 And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?

They are blind because of the will of God,

THE JEWS ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO ARE BLIND, this is important, the gentiles are blind too and they don't pay any heeed to the Jewish leaders.

Eph 4:17 This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,
18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: 19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

Plus Historically that is not true of the Jews, blindness extended far from Jerusalem, just read acts

Acts 14:19 And there came thither certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people, and, having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead.

Acts 16:9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.

Yes all of Israel rejected the old covenant and that is why God punished them with the Assyrian dispersion of (Israel) northern kingdom and the Babylonian captivity of the southern kingdom(Judah)

I went throutgh pains to explain this to you before, the Assyrians took all twelve tribes captive (including Judah, even Dr. Murray knows this, actually , I learned it from him) it is not important to the point but you might as well be accurate about these things

Not all of Israel but only Judah and Levi rejected the new covenant .To this very day they are blind to the salvation in Christ

There is not a shred of evidence to suppoort that claim, an there is plenty to dipute it. Plus like I said, the gentiles are blind too and everyine else is blind too, all but the elect.

Act 13:24 When John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.

They reciev ed not John they recieved not Jesus, the election obtained and the rest were blinded.

Why would I dispute Isa: 6:13

because you say only a smattering of Israelites were left, but this idea is divorced from reality, 1/10th of a million is 10,000, but even a number less than that, after 500 years equals a multitude, that is, if they are safe and secure, if they are living in hostile lands, among the heathen, few in number, and forgottren who they are... I doubt much would be left.

Paul you use the following verse as to proof that my position on the blindness of Judah, which we have been contending about, is incorrect.

Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

This verse is not in regards to the new covenant rather it is in regards to the blindness of all of Israel to the old covenant .

Wrong, Paul is talking about the new testament in verse seven, actually he is talking about a universal truth about Israel, and it reall applies to the rest as wll, as I have shown the gentiles are blind too. He only uses the example of Elijah as an example, Bob, you cannot take a digressive structure like the example of Elijah and make that the subject of the chapter, especially when a subject is already established. You skip verse one, you ignore the continued theme from chapter 10 (the whole point is about coming into the New covenant).

To then say that verse seven then is about the old covenant is .... pick a word Bob. Read verses 1 5, 6, and 7, and read chapter 10, then read them five more times slowly, but you are blind. That kind of mishandling is exactly why I run into so much trouble with you, I feel like I am forced to say that the interpretive methods used are corrupt, flawed, dismally bad, the reading of the passage displays ineptitude, lack of understanding, blindness, and what can you do bt take it personally? I don't blame you. Believe me, I don't want to even say it anymore, I'd really just like toget along and stick to the issues, but at the same time I feel liukke it is an insult to even give this sort of scholarship any attention at all, like it should be dismissed completely. I'd just like you to understand that it takes a great deal of patience on my part to even have to deal with this. I feel like I should stop adressing you personally, and speak directly to readers.

So even though Israel rejected the first covenant God gleaned 7000 out of it.

I would not put it that way, Bob has problems over generalizing things, as though this 7000 were the only ones saved from Israel, during the entire preiod they were rejecting the covenant (a perod of nearly 500 years) I think he might not mean that, he is probably just having touble expressing himself..

Now God punished Israel for rejecting that first covenant with dispersion and the lose of national identity.

Not going to argue

God punished Judah for rejecting the first covenant with blindness to the new covenant.

No Judah was punished with captivity. After which Judah continued in the first covenant. True blindness was part of the curse of disobedience to the law, but still, they were not rejecting it like they were before the captivity, going after strange God's and such. Even so, I can't say "Ok," here, you are boiling Israel's problems down too simplisticly.

Paul the apostle tells us there is also now at the time that he is speaking of, that there is also a remnant according to the election of grace.

This election of grace has come about as the result of the new covenant and part of that election would be of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. For the twelve are of that brand for starters.

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

A remnant of the Jews, when you say "lost sheep," you mean other people than Jesus had in mind, Paul had the jews in mind, Jews like himself.

Paul the apostle goes on to tell us that they (Judah) are blinded to this very day,his day, well after the death of Christ.

The problem with your interpretations is that the word "Israel" apparently means whatever you wnat it to mean, Paul is talking about Israel, but you want to make it "just Judah &co." How can we have a discussion if Israel is not Israel?

You are getting two different cases of blindness mixed up.And so it is that Judah is in the previously described condition to this very day,for they are still looking for their Messiah.

No, I'm not, and there is a such a thing as "Jews for Jesus", and the Jews are all the tribes of Israel. The one stick.

He goes on to say that some of the branches were broken off of the original tree,not all.

They were broken off so that you and I may be grafted in and that condition will stay in effect until the time of the gentiles is finished. Go ahead deny it.

Go ahead, keep using irritating rhetoric. Some refers to some, not ONE branch, but some branchES, plural, not just the tribe of Judah, but it refers symbolicly to all of Israel who have been blinded. Without respect to tribe.

And what do you know! they are election even as they are cursed. God is fair. Yes God is going to heal the breach and I am fully aware of that but it has not happened yet

Whatever, this is all getting into your own theological mess, the basic premises are faulty, your foundation is faulty so all the stuff you build on it is faulty too.

Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

Rom 11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

They are elect and God loves them,why should I love them any less.They are under a curse for the time being for our sakes.

Whatever.

WE the Gentiles will be grafted in through faith according to grace, as joint heirs

Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Titus 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

James 2:5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?

There will be no joining of two sticks until all of the joint heirs(the rest of Israel) have been grafted in.

The Two sticks do not fit in with the branches analogy, you are crossing symbols way too far out of context

When God lifts that curse he will graft them back in ,that is join the two sticks.

Two stick do not fit in with the branches analogy you are crossing symbols, besides, the sticks were already joined before Jesus came. That is why he and the apostles refered to the people who we call jews as being Israel. The jews are Israel. Period. How come you never say just who these lost sheep are?

And so all of Israel shall be saved ,but the grafting in of the ( joint heirs) Gentile part of Israel has not been completed

So what has been established. It has been established that all of Israel was blind to the first covenant.

Now I'm dumbfounded, uh, no, whatever, I thought you said they rejected the first and etc. I don't think the bible ever makes reference to "being blind to covenants" you have a knack, like Dr. Murray, for focusing on totally irrelevant issues, What does any of this have to do with saving my soul from sin???

They are blind to the truth, like many today.

It has been established that not all of Israel was blinded to the second covenant ,for the lost sheep of the house of Israel accepted it.

This part :

for the lost sheep of the house of Israel accepted it.

WHERE??? When??? Who???? Bob you are MAKING THIS UP. No such thing was established, WHO ARE THEY????

It has been established that part of Israel has been blinded for the sake of the Gentile.

It has been established that part of Israel has been blinded and will stay blind until the time of the Gentile has come to an end or run its full course.

It has been established that those in Christ become joint heirs with ancestral Israel

It has been established that the joining of the joint heirs and the regrafting of the broken branches too Israel will complete it and so all Israel will be saved.

It has been established that all of Israel is elect wether joint heirs or ancestral

The branches that are cut off, and do not get grafted in, get cast into the fire, I can't even agree with the parts of what you are saying that might be true in another context because a little leaven leavens all of it. You make the word lie.

In 70 AD Israel was literally destroyed by the Romans and Israel again lost its national identity,

What? They only lost their land, not their identity. Literally destroyed? You toss around the word literally a little too liberally.

not just for 70 years as in the Babylonian captivity but for 2000 years.Throughout the world during that 2000 years they have been continuously persecuted and conflicted to this very day because of the curse of blindness that God placed upon them.

It is not just blindness, (Deuteronomy 28)

So what is all this jargon that you are spouting about prophecy.Yes in 1948 God began gathering them back to Israel the ancestral land but there is still no peace or joining together ,for the process of grafting in of the Gentile is not complete.

? Israel was made into one stick after the babylonian captivity, the Geneologies of Ezra prove that, and the testimony of the savior and his apostles prove it. It was from this unified Israel that branches were broken off that the gentiles could be grafted in.

Paul, this has nothing to do with racism it is our fathers word.

Yes, it does, no, it isn't.

But here we go again ,I am now not only a racist but an anal racist.I have endeavored to keep this exchange free from that kind of rhetoric but you could not resist. Yes you may say that I am too sensitive,but I have been here for a while,taking your guff.If I am anal for trying to prove a point ,what does it make you for denying everything I bring forth?I have told you before and I am telling you again ,if you persist I will end the thread,and that is what I am doing right here and now. Have your say and post.

Just this

If I am anal for trying to prove a point ,what does it make you for denying everything I bring forth?

I find the things you bring forth to be tiresome and false, I deny them because they are lies and should be repudiated, I can't even agree with the parts of what you are saying that might be true in another context because a little leaven leavens all of it.

Sincerely

Paul